Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:35:45 +0200 From: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More kernel performance tests on FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT Message-ID: <505D6A51.7090808@zedat.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <505CDE9C.3060504@andric.com> References: <505CDE9C.3060504@andric.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig1C7F58C05E57CC0BF478D198 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am 09/21/12 23:39, schrieb Dimitry Andric: > Hi all, >=20 > As a followup to my previous post about the performance of FreeBSD 10.0= > kernels compiled with different compilers (clang and gcc), I did anothe= r > series of tests, now on a more modern machine (Core i5-based). I also > tested the performance with different compiler optimization settings. >=20 > The attached text file[1] contains more information about these tests, > performance data, and my conclusions. Any errors and omissions are als= o > my fault, so if you notice them, please let me know. >=20 > The executive summary: GENERIC kernels compiled with clang 3.2 are agai= n > a little faster than those compiled with gcc 4.2.1. For gcc, compiling= > with -O2 also gives a slightly faster kernel than with -O1, but for > clang there is no measurable difference between those flags. >=20 > Again, many thanks to Gavin Atkinson for providing the required > hardware. >=20 > -Dimitry >=20 > [1]: Also available at: > <http://www.andric.com/freebsd/perftest/perftest-kernel-2012-09-21a.txt= > At least one can say FreeBSD does not suffer from performance drain using the cutting edge clang 3.2 compared with a gcc 4.2.1 compiler, the echo from the past. Dimirty, are you planning also to benchmark clang 3.2 versus gcc 4.8.0? =46rom the development point of view, such a benchmark would be more natural, but I do not know whether the kernel sources are gcc 4.8-friendly and would allow such a test. What is about optimization level "-O3" and architectural recognition via "-march=3Dnative"? Neverthelesse, thanks. oh --------------enig1C7F58C05E57CC0BF478D198 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQXWpWAAoJEOgBcD7A/5N8AgIIANntmW/GqIqvECyVPtzglJHy /wLGo4dpAhC+SdRu6VbANjF0U1kxhiplig9uUG7e/CjCs8FkJmeQgJfN2MKDPqt1 CDf6bvt8TyRYIKcNwLoh/sFGJgMOUdDE/aY37YQIK8mz8a4irZQA4ndVcRA/th9O 3EitJhl0ahNZw11shsH5ydqmngY1vp+vOfIvU05wvXZt5R89zVYOyfsp07EnfbHf yRNOQlXTPIUm+AOw2zWg7tETNSpA6BDoME77hOKan9K7VpMlZDH7qvA5EaIatyLU MraOCwKx2C+nB7VKnHpH9faoD5jwAuZXZ3tn3j5ruNyiytUUkZNMMET4M250mzU= =u5gS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig1C7F58C05E57CC0BF478D198--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?505D6A51.7090808>